I have been watching the events on BBC quite a bit over the last few days. Seems there were about 10 co-ordinated attacks. Mumbai being India's Beacon of multi-cultural harmony and the future of India being a world power. It's a place for both business and tourism and the attacks are thought to have been very well planned.

Surreal seeing footage of crowds watching people in their hotel room windows, unable to get out. I think the Taj Mahal hotel is nigh on cleared now by indian commandos. I did see a miltitary general refer to the attacks to be potentially from Pakistan. Obviously a lot of dis-array at the moment.

And all this will continue until these young men in their twenties believe that they have other better options than martyrdom. Right now the "foot soldiers" are joining these packs because they have nothing else to do - often illiterate and ignorant of almost everything but religious instruction, and with no skills except being violent. They are like the inhabitants of Jim Jones' collective, but worse - they want to take people with them.

It's the leaders that I really blame ... those who know what hell they are unleashing. It's in their best interest to keep these young men without education, and with no economic hope of a lifestyle that provides for a family - the natural tendency for humans since time immemorial.

He's onto something here: what the Muslim terrorists object to is modernity, self-determination, sex, money, and anything else that runs against the pathetic small-mindedness and ignorant bigotry of fundamentalist religion.

What They Hate About MumbaiBy SUKETU MEHTAPublished: November 28, 2008 / New York Times

MY bleeding city. My poor great bleeding heart of a city. Why do they go after Mumbai? There

I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.

Yes, we cannot give in to the hateful close-mindedness of terrorists, but for crying out loud, there are other responses than to spend money. We can all adopt the attitude of working for a better world so extremists have something to live for, rather than dying for the fairy tales of their faith. Get involved in your community locally, teach kids to read (or teach anyone any other skills), give a loan to someone starting a small business, and on and on. When you make the world better for everyone, not just those jetting off to Mumbai to spend their accumulated dough, we will see an end to terrorism.

Logged

All you've got to do is choose love. That's how I live it now. I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden. I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.

He's being slightly ironic: he's thumbing his nose at the religious puritans and telling people to go right on doing what their doing, and in fact to do more of precisely what p*sses the godly off because all of it's more life affirming and fully human than anything a vicious fool with a god dredged out of the worst part of the dark ages stuck in his head can imagine. Anyway, he makes your point, too:

But the best answer to the terrorists is to dream bigger, make even more money, and visit Mumbai more than ever. Dream of making a good home for all Mumbaikars, not just the denizens of $500-a-night hotel rooms. Dream not just of Bollywood stars like Aishwarya Rai or Shah Rukh Khan, but of clean running water, humane mass transit, better toilets, a responsive government. Make a killing not in God

I suppose. He focuses far too much on money for me-- "Make a killing not in God

Logged

All you've got to do is choose love. That's how I live it now. I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden. I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.

Yes, we cannot give in to the hateful close-mindedness of terrorists, but for crying out loud, there are other responses than to spend money. We can all adopt the attitude of working for a better world so extremists have something to live for, rather than dying for the fairy tales of their faith. Get involved in your community locally, teach kids to read (or teach anyone any other skills), give a loan to someone starting a small business, and on and on. When you make the world better for everyone, not just those jetting off to Mumbai to spend their accumulated dough, we will see an end to terrorism.

harihead the 7/7 London suicide bombers were involved in the community one was a teaching assistant and another helped run a Fish and Chip shop business .These guy's were respected in my community , i know this as i live very close to where they lived and worked. The people of Leeds were shocked that two of there own could do such a thing .We live completly seperate to Muslim's now any sense of community spirt as gone , it's difficult to do what you say when trust as gone .In my city thats now the case , we don't get along anymore , suppose in that respect terrorism as won ?

Thanks for understanding, Geoff. I'm genuinely distressed over what I see as a return to feudal lordship in what are supposed to be democratic-based societies. And these pinheads really think they're better than me-- who died and made you lord?

DaveRam, that's such a sad situation. Although my friend wasn't serious, it really does sound for a case of putting all the instigators or supporters on an island. You certainly experienced a betrayal of trust by people who should have known better. They were in your community and knew you as people. What makes a person so whacked they want to go out and commit mass murder? So yes, I can see that taking a long time to rebuild, and they will have to earn it. As long as you have whackjobs trying to impose their world view on others, we'll have this unrest. Why can't everyone just agree to get along? (slaps around the whackjob leaders who are the only ones who gain from it)

Logged

All you've got to do is choose love. That's how I live it now. I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden. I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

And these pinheads really think they're better than me-- who died and made you lord?

Einstein, in an entirely different context, said something about God being subtle and not malicious. Religious fundamentalists, Muslim and otherwise, believe precisely the reverse: that God is about as subtle as a TV evangelist's pitch for money, and as malicious as a suicide bombing. Maybe fundamentalism is really a form of anti-religion?

I don't pretend to understand the religious mind. God supposedly is love, yet he smites believer and infidel alike and consigns most people to everlasting torture. In all honesty, I see no difference at all between the Judeo-Christian god and Zeus, god of thunderbolts. It's all some wacky deity myth that just sounds ridiculous.

Einstein, as I suspect you know, did not believe in a personal god either. His use of "god" refers to the spirit of Nature. Religious people have hijacked his words, even after he tried to set them straight. A couple of quotes from here: http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einprayr.htm

Quote

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

...

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science.

My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance-but for us, not for God.

He expresses himself so well. Yes, morality is of the utmost importance. I cannot conceive of a god worthy of the name who commands his followers to butcher unarmed innocent people. I can conceive of a world where the rest of us get together and say, "This is always unacceptable" and do what we can to make sure it doesn't happen again, and that the vicious perpetrators of this deplorable act are punished.

Logged

All you've got to do is choose love. That's how I live it now. I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden. I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

Reading Einstein's quotes, I get the impression that he did believe in a higher power. He doesn't come off atheist, just anti-organized religion. He uses the phrase, "personal god", which I think shows that he's saying he doesn't support the belief of this sort of judging entity that sits on his throne controlling his creations. Anyway, that's what I get out of this quote:

"My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance-but for us, not for God."

He knows that our awareness is so small that it's impossible to say with one hundred percent conviction that a higher power doesn't exist. I think people of his great intellect AND enlightenment often feel this way. They remain open. At least that's what I'm getting out of it. Of course, I'm probably completely wrong!

I think John Lennon expressed a similar belief. From what I've read. Just an openness to possibility I guess. Naive or not. Who knows.

"I believe in God, but not as one thing, not as an old man in the sky. I believe that what people call God is something in all of us. I believe that what Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha and all the rest said was right. It's just that the translations have gone wrong."

and

"I believe in everything until it's disproved. So I believe in fairies, the myths, dragons. It all exists, even if it's in your mind. Who's to say that dreams and nightmares aren't as real as the here and now?"

Anyway, it's people who pervert religion anyway. As they do so many things. They kill in God's name and use it as an excuse for their hatred. Doesn't mean God or the concept of God is bad. A lot of people get something very good out of it. And I'm betting there's a hell of a lot more who get something positive out of it than negative. That's just not discussed. People will be people. If there were no concept of God, there would be something else to use as an excuse. It's all down to the individual and what they choose to do with it. I certainly wouldn't begrudge anyone their beliefs if that's what gets them through the day or compels them to do the right thing. Some people need to feel that they're being watched over and cared for. Some don't. Who's to say which is right and which is wrong? To confuse the issue because some radicals take the concept and use it to commit acts of violence based on their own narrow minded grasp of reality is just a waste of time. There's a deeper problem here. Which I think Alexis hit on a bit earlier.

I seem to remember the same advice being given in America after our 9/11 attacks-- go out and spend! I didn't find that an appropriate or respectful attitude regarding the tragedy then, and I don't find Mehta's "work hard and party harder" invocation at all compelling either.

As this is an international forum and some of us are young and impressionable, I find it necessary to comment on harihead's statement. Having personally witnessed the tragedy at the World Trade Center, my recollections are more precise. There were certainly no calls to "go out and spend" made after the attack either by the government or the press. Indeed, New York City was in a lockdown mode for over two days. It was quite eerie making my way into NYC on the following day. Only doctors, hospital staff and emergency workers could enter into Manhattan. After the military checked my credentials, I was permitted to cross the George Washington Bridge to get to Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center where I am a surgeon on staff. Most of lower Manhattan was without electricity. Businesses and schools were shut and everyone was at home, still in shock over the events of the preceeding day and fearing further attack. The only advice being given was to those qualified to assist in rescue, recovery and treatment of the injured.

Perhaps the passage of time and current economic and political affairs have colored the memories of individuals who were situated a distance from the areas of attack, but I assure all readers that no insensitive remarks such as Mr. Mehta's were made after the 9/11 attacks.

I'm sorry, Barry, I should have been more clear. The call to spend, as I recall, was after the recession associated with the tragedy kicked in. It was not an immediate call. I in no way intended to cause more pain to those of you who experienced this tragedy. I only meant to convey how disgusted I was to hear that "call to arms", particularly as our military, which you could reasonably expect to be anywhere in the world in 24 hours, took a month to get to Afghanistan. Bin Laden would have to be an idiot to sit there the entire time waiting for us. I am still furious over this misdirection and inadequacy of the US response.

Logged

All you've got to do is choose love. That's how I live it now. I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden. I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

It's just not realistic to think that our military; Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, can be anywhere in the world, fully deployed with appropriate weaponry and backup personnel, in 24 hours. The month it took was a feat in itself. The patriotic hearts of the armed forces can be thanked for that.

Yes, Bin Laden is no fool and no doubt was on the move constantly at the time. And obviously still is today. But it is of little matter, really. His capture would not mean the end of Al-Qaida. The objective in Afghanistan was and is more complicated than that.

The call to spend, as I recall, was after the recession associated with the tragedy kicked in. It was not an immediate call.

Yeah; nobody was being glib about 9/11- the idea was to encourage consumption in order to prop up demand and keep the economy moving. It sounds facetious, but at least with respect to economic activity, it isn't, and there was fear of a big economic contraction that winter. Reducing the basic idea to "go shop" was trivializing it, though, because it left out things like go invest, go build, and go get an education.

Geoff, we were already in a mild recession at the time of the attacks and had been for about a year. The recession deepened a bit after 9/11 but it was not as deep as had been predicted in the late 1990s.